Discover more

Law textbooks and casebooks South Asia rights Legal writing style guides Legal ethics training programs Human rights documentaries Legal news subscriptions

The Leaflet

What will it take for India to finally innovate a legal regime for its heat-stressed outdoor workers? | The Leaflet

Environment/Animal Rights Labour Law Governance Opinion

What will it take for India to finally innovate a legal regime for its heat-stressed outdoor workers?

India’s construction workers find themselves at the cross hairs between lack of any protection in law and worsening climate change. Some strong policy rethinking could improve, potentially save many lives.

Gayatri Singh

Published on: 9 September 2025, 02:51 pm

What will it take for India to finally innovate a legal regime for its heat-stressed outdoor workers?

DRIVEN BY ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE CHANGE and resultant rapid global warming, extreme weather events have become increasingly common in the recent decades. Prolonged spells of extreme temperatures combined with high humidity and associated atmospheric conditions, commonly referred to as heat waves, adversely affect people in various ways, resulting in heat strokes, mild to serious illnesses, and even death.

A meteorological monograph published by the Indian Ministry of Earth Sciences and Indian Meteorological Department (‘IMD’) reports that the frequency, intensity, and duration of heat waves in India is only going to worsen further and that the risk of heatwaves is projected to increase tenfold in the twenty-first century.

In 2024, India saw its longest recorded heat wave since 2010. Last year there were more than 44,000 cases of heat stroke. These figures, however, are grossly underestimated, as cases of injuries and deaths in rural areas go severely underreported.

However, the crisis of heat waves, rather than being an equalizer of all people, is a force multiplier of existing inequalities. The risk of serious or fatal health hazards is disproportionately high on vulnerable segments of populations whose livelihoods involve strenuous physical activity and outdoor work with workers being denied the statutory protections extended to other workers.

A study conducted for Duke University’s Demography Journal found that marginalised caste groups, who dominate the informal-outdoors workforce of the country, faced up to 150 percent higher heat exposure during work as compared to dominant caste groups.

Further, health vulnerabilities related to heat weigh heavier on women workers, particularly pregnant and lactating workers. For this significant proportion of the country’s unorganised and self-employed workforce, foregoing work during high heat periods or facing health risks are the only options, and both options have detrimental impact on their already precarious livelihoods. Overall, the crisis of heat waves underscores the ultimate indivisibility of social justice from environmental justice.

International law

The International Labour Organization has recognized strengthening, prevention and control strategies for heat stress in the workplace as “a matter of urgency.” The ILO’s 2024 Report titled “Heat at Work” details the dangers of excessive workplace heat:

“Heat stress is an invisible killer. It can immediately impact workers on the job, by leading to illnesses such as heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and even death, as has already been witnessed in many regions of the world. In the longer term, workers are developing serious and debilitating chronic diseases, impacting the cardiovascular and respiratory systems, as well as the kidneys. The mental health impacts must also be considered, as well the numerous accidents and injuries occurring due to reduced cognitive performance, slippery and heated surfaces and unsuitable personal protective equipment (PPE). While workers in all sectors may be adversely affected, some face unique exposure situations placing them at higher risk, including migrant and informal workers, pregnant women, indoor workers in unventilated environments, and those working outdoors in physically demanding roles.”

The ILO Convention 155, ratified by 81 countries, underscores the duty of nations to implement health and safety protocols to protect workers from occupational hazards. In 2022, the ILO recognised that a safe and healthy working environment is a fundamental right at work and revised its safety guidelines to include heat stress protection. In the same year, the United Nations General Assembly recognised the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment as a human right, emphasising the urgency of effectuating climate change related worker protections.

Another Report from the ILO titled “Ensuring safety and health at work in a changing climate,” emphasises the need for nations to adopt increased safety standards for workers in the face of new hazards driven by climate change like excessive heat. In 2023, the International Labour Conference adopted a resolution concerning a just transition towards environmentally sustainable economies for all, by which governments would commit to “urgently implement occupational safety and health measures for all workers impacted by climate-related risks and extreme weather events addressing the consequences on mental and physical health and promoting safe and healthy working environments.”

The Building and Wood Workers’ International (BWI), a global union federation, in its Report titled “Adapting To the Heat”, recorded attempts made by BWI affiliates all over the world to ensure that employers and governments protect workers from exposure to high temperatures at work. This international comparison provides a model of effective approaches to resiliency and demonstrates that simple, yet targeted strategies are available to policymakers who wish to tackle this issue.

Domestic law

Drawing from Articles 21, 39 (e), 41 and 43 of the Indian Constitution, the Supreme Court of India in its landmark ruling in Consumer Education and Research Center v. Union of India (1995) held that the right to health, medical aid to protect the health and vigor to a worker while in service or post-retirement is a fundamental right under the Constitution. In a series of such judgements, the top Court held that a workers’ right to health is a fundamental right under Article 21, and has even, exercising its power under Articles 32 and 142, issued guidelines and directions to protect various sections of workers from workplace hazards.

More recently, the Supreme Court has held in M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India (2024) that unmitigated exposure to extreme heat as a result of climate change violates the rights to health and equality. Commendably taking into consideration that the costs of climate change are bound to be borne disproportionately by those already marginalized, the Court held that Article 14 is to be read along with the right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change. Furthermore, Article 21 secures a right to life, which the Court has held to include a right to health. In the case of construction workers, it is clear that their constitutional rights to health and equality are impacted by the lack of a heat standard for outdoor work.

Up to 75 percent of the workforce in India, roughly 380 million people, depend on heat-exposed labour to earn their livelihoods. Of this large segment, construction workers are particularly vulnerable to heat stress given the physical demands of their jobs. Many of the standard activities required for construction work are classified by the International Organization for Standardization (‘ISO’) as high to very high metabolic rate activity, as it requires actions such as “carrying heavy material, pushing or pulling heavily loaded hand carts, and intense shoveling or digging.”

The heatwave brought about an unexpected red-green solidarity this May Day in Delhi

However, the heat experienced by working people in reality is far away from the heat recorded by the State, its instruments, and its machines. The measure of temperature itself comes from weather monitoring stations, which are, as a practical shortcoming, in relatively better shaded and less populated areas than the work sites of construction workers. How, then, does the IMD consider the temperature prevailing in densely populated areas and account for the Urban Heat Island Effect? It simply does not.

Already shunned from equal access to resources, this population is further exposed to intense heat conditions by construction materials that absorb and retain heat for longer periods, poor ventilation and dangerous air quality. Moreover, heat is experienced differently according to one’s physical activity or metabolic rate. Continuous exposure to high temperatures, as the construction workers face, has deleterious effects on the human body. And if the temperature is not measured as it is experienced by the workers, there is no way to accurately account for the true impact on workers’ health and safety.

What are the shortcomings in our legal framework?

Broadly, we notice that certain crucial existing regulations on workers either do not engage with heat stress as a critical issue, or when they do, do not deal with heat stress in outdoor environments.

Globally, the wet bulb globe temperature (‘WBGT’) is the commonly adopted indicator for heat stress by legal systems and occupational safety and health professionals alike. WBGT takes into account all the components of heat stress or ‘heat as experienced’: temperature, humidity, wind speed, and thermal radiation. Depending on the metabolic rate/intensity of work of the various classes of workers and the construction material, dimensions, and ventilation of the workplace, the thresholds of WBGT are set. An increase of 1 degree Celsius in WBGT can have detrimental effects on the health of the workers. Temperatures above 29 to 32 degree Celsius are considered extreme threats to workers health and safety.

However, this maximum threshold is questionable as various other factors ought to be taken into consideration, like the region, vulnerability, old age, disability, gender, etc. ILO Report titled “Heat at Work” presents an analysis of heat stress indicators and safety thresholds adopted by various countries and expert organizations.

Factories Act, 1948

The standard adopted by India’s central occupational safety and health legislation, i.e., The Factories Act, 1948 and the Model Rules framed by the Union Government thereunder is the Wet Bulb Temperature, which only takes into account temperature and humidity.

The shortcomings of the structure of HAPs far outweigh the few welcome provisions. The Centre for Policy Research’s (CPR) Report titled “How is India Adapting to Heat Waves?”, a remarkable assessment of HAPs across the country, makes these shortcomings very clear. Already being mere advisories with no enforceability, most HAPs are not built for the local context. CPR’s Report finds that only 2 out of 37 HAPs on the city, district, and state levels that are surveyed have carried out and presented actionable vulnerability assessment. Lack of funding the implementation of HAPs, and the lack of political will and bureaucratic inertia exacerbate these shortcomings. From a transparency and accountability point of view, the structure does not even pass the base level expectation of having a centralized database of HAPs and the status of its performance, meaning there is no formal and regular measure of success or implementation.

As stated in the CPR Report, HAPs are not adequately tailored for local conditions in cities or habitations and do not adequately incorporate indicators like humidity, hot nights, built up area ratio, density of vegetation, type of land surface, or other critical contextual factors that inform vulnerability to extreme heat.

And yet, some welcome provisions, such as establishing nodal officers and identifying the line departments for specific issues, laying down standard operating procedures, and establishing communication channels endow HAPs with potential for success, if used properly. With these basic institutional structures, HAPs can be used to send heatwave alerts, which would be a vital tool to improve workplace safety if utilized to help workers prepare for incoming heat stress.

Broadly we notice that the Factories Act, the BoCW, the Disaster Management Act and the National Guidelines, have all fallen short of accounting of the heat stress faced by workers in outdoor settings, most prominently, construction workers.

A summary of the shortcomings is provided: